No Conspiracy: IRS Agent Joe Banister Acquitted

No Conspiracy: IRS Agent Joe Banister Acquitted

At approximately 2 p.m. on the 14th floor of the Federal Court Building in Sacramento, California, Joe Banister supporters got word that the
judge had received a note from the jury and quickly moved from the hallway into the courtroom. He announced that the jury had reached a unanimous
decision.

The verdicts were read by the clerk of the court with Judge William Shubb presiding: "Not Guilty", "Not Guilty", "Not Guilty", "Not Guilty". Carol
Delaney, assistant prosecutor in the case, was not in attendance at the verdict.

This is a landmark case. Especially with the second charge. No one has ever been convicted for failure to pay income tax. Because it is not a crime.
In fact no one has ever been charged with failure to pay. The charges are always like above. They get most people with failure to file and fraudulent
filing etc. It is a means of intimidation and most people cave due to said intimidation.

Still I doubt this will give many people courage to stop paying these thugs and thieves due to the fact they will continue to intimidate and strike
fear into the hearts of the average citizen. The average citizen does not know and understand enough to challenge these thugs and just wants to be
left alone. I don't blame them I spent to many years fighting these bastards with little if any returns.

Still I hope this will be another huge chunk taken out of thier armor!

Read the second link for the details of the case and specific charges and note the second charge.

The importance of this, particularly in THESE times, where the average tax-payer is UNDER SIEGE by bankster elitists, the fed's continual scamming
shenanigans, and continual schemes by their puppets in the gov to run up our debt, is IMMEASURABLE!

I just posted the following thread, which advocates non-compliance with continuing to pay taxes to this enterprise which is not allocating tax-dollars
whatsoever to their intended purposes:

I agree however still I am cautiously optimistic because the IRS will not let this stand Joe is to high profile in the Anti-IRS movement. Others have
won significant cases but the IRS regroups and will trump up some new charges eventually and get a Judge who works with them not letting key evidence
in etc. and rail roads the person. Especially high profile people like Joe. Sherrie Jackson is a good example another former IRS agent who is now in
prison after her sham of a trial.

Still this is another landmark case to help educate people on the thieves and criminals known as the IRS. If only the people would realize these
people and everyone who works for them are nothing but thieves and criminals and treat them accordingly. if only people would realize how many lives
they have ruined and the major role they play in the economic and monetary crisis there would be revolution by morning.

So with the shock of the outcome of this trial, are we to believe that something will come of the people's ability to " op out " if we so chose? I
understand the case, but I don't think that this particular outcome will have a dramatic effect on the peoples ability to decide whether or not they
wish to continue paying into this scheme.

Though I know that the taxes in general are unconstitutional, I don't think there will be any positive outcome for " we the people".

Once again, great thread! An important victory for those of us who still believe in true liberty and freedom. Though eventually, he will indeed be
railroaded by a bought and paid for IRS sympathetic judge who doesn't mind crushing the truth and the constitution to help keep the cabal's criminal
syndicate well oiled and oppressive to the max!

So many people sign Federal paperwork under penalty of perjury and they really have no clue as to what they are signing.... they are told to sign it
(the Social Security Card, the W-4) and they do it (so they can have a job and work for a living).

Fundamentally Joe Bannister's battle was not about taxes..... it is about FREEDOM. Joe Bannister did his thing very publicly for all the world to see.
It doesn't happen to everybody that way. Fact is, much of the "IRS" collection system works using 3rd party information and automated processes. Look
for real pen / ink signatures on IRS paperwork. If the paperwork is demanding something legally from you or someone like you, impeaching the "IRS
signature" is an effective first defense.

Whatever the form in which the Government functions, anyone entering into an arrangement with the Government takes the risk of having
accurately ascertained that he who purports to act for the Government stays within the bounds of his authority. The scope of this authority may be
explicitly defined by Congress or be limited by delegated legislation, properly exercised through the rule-making power. And this is so even though,
as here, the agent himself may have been unaware of the limitations upon his authority. See, e.g., Utah Power & Light Co. v. United States, 243 U.S.
389, 409 , 391; United States v. Stewart, 311 U.S. 60, 70 , 108, and see, generally, In re Floyd Acceptances, 7 Wall. 666.

This is Supreme Court case is as unambiquous as it gets: The computerized & photocopied signatures of IRS pseudonyms (Yes, they use FAKE NAMES) on IRS
paperwork can be challenged.

DO YOUR OWN RESEARCH and Due Diligence. Respond to all registered mail from them with registered mail from you. Challenge the identity and
authority of the photocopied signatures. Forbid them the use of third party information. Give them notice that any further unsigned documents could be
considered mail fraud under the statutes. In the body of your corrrespondences always demand a referral to the TIGTA. When you have that finished
(should be 1 page in length) you sign your own document (like an affidavit) under penalty of perjury.

Of course - you would not do any of the above without first consulting your conscience and your belief system.

edit on 3/29/2011 by
SayonaraJupiter because: *add the full Supreme Court citation

I can't find a date for the OP's linked article, and I couldn't find anything with a google source to corroborate this story(on the contrary, in
fact). I would love to not have to pay my taxes, and I personally believe that they're unconstitutional in their current form, but can we find any
other links anywhere to confirm this?

This content community relies on user-generated content from our member contributors. The opinions of our members are not those of site ownership who maintains strict editorial agnosticism and simply provides a collaborative venue for free expression.